Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Martha Raddatz wants us to stand with Moore accusers but pay no attention to the Menendez trial

Published

on

Martha Raddatz Hypocrisy

Martha Raddatz, your bias is showing.  On one hand, you say you’re disgusted with the voters of Alabama that are willing to give Roy Moore the doubt.

ABC’s Raddatz Disgusted By Skeptics of Allegations Against Roy Moore

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2017/11/12/abcs-raddatz-disgusted-skeptics-allegations-against-roy-mooreLast week, The Washington Post reported that Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore allegedly pursued relationships with teenagers when he was in his 30s and that he allegedly molested a 14-year-old girl. It was the latest in the avalanche of recent sexual misconduct allegations sweeping the nation. And while many believed the claims, others took them with a grain of salt citing the timing as suspicious. On Sunday’s Good Morning America, ABC’s Martha Raddatz used her analysis to express her frustration and contempt for such people. “I don’t really know what those voters are waiting for,” she huffed.

Yet, you only talk about Senator Bob Menendez’s corruption trial for only 16 seconds.  Menendez is a Democrat from New Jersey.  Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain is what I say.

Raddatz Promises to Discuss Menendez Trial, Only Gives It 16 Seconds

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2017/11/12/raddatz-promises-discuss-menendez-trial-only-gives-it-16ABC’s Martha Raddatz was on a mission against Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore on Sunday. After decrying skeptical Alabama voters for just not getting the message, she grilled White House Adviser Kellyanne Conway during This Week on if Moore should step aside. But no matter how many times Conway explained that she felt he should if the allegations were true, Raddatz insisted Conway was defending him. Conway called Raddatz out and pointed to the media’s double standard on ethics and failing to adequately report the corruption trial of Democratic New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez. Raddatz promised a full discussion later in the show, but it never came.

In spite of a bad interview Moore did with Sean Hannity, this only should show you that as with Bill Clinton, the progressive pagans expect us to uphold and honor our values while they get to trash them as much as they want.  Funny thing is Alabama voters might just listen to Raddatz for once.   At least according to the following story published in Newsmax.

New Poll Shows Jones Ahead of Moore in Alabama Senate Race

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/doug-jones-roy-moore-alabama-senate-race/2017/11/12/id/825636/Democratic candidate for Senate Doug Jones has a slight lead over his Republican opponent Roy Moore in a public opinion poll recently released about the Alabama special election.

A poll of 500 voters conducted by JMC Polling and Analytics November 9 and 11 in cities across the state showed Jones ahead at 46 percent among likely voters who said they would support Jones if the election was held tomorrow. Moore drew a 42 percent response, with 9 percent saying they were undecided.

Steve Deace sums this up the best:

If the game is now anytime someone makes an accusation you’re guilty, and the credibility of the accuser who lacks explicit evidence is verboten, enjoy your star chamber.

The Left will kill us with that scam. Yet many on the so-called “Right” now seemingly want to play it.

Deace also comments about Bush 41:

This is now the third (or sixth, I lost count) different woman to come forward on George HW Bush. By rules of “conservative media” — many of whom are Bush alums — set forth this past week, his reputation is now ruined and forfeit.

Because it’s about the seriousness of the allegations, not their veracity. Oh, and you can’t question the credibility of the accusers who offer nothing but their own word, either. Those are the rules now. Mitt Romney taught me that.

The biggest danger with this kind of thinking is that it will trickle down if not already with women who have axes to grind, want to make quick money, or just get men into trouble.  I have been accused of these things myself by strange women who just did it me because they felt like it, or whatever.

It is a double standard with these people.  They want to express themselves as women, especially their sexual prowess (intentional or not) but they want to destroy certain men for noticing it.

Sadly there is and will always be a certain degree of sex appeal.  Not just in popular culture and music but in sports (Swimming would be my favorite), high culture (I am a sucker for classically trained female singers regardless if they are Soprano, Mezzo, or Contralto) etc.  What we have to do is not come across as someone who is a sexual predator either by the way we speak and/or just keeping our hands to ourselves.  I don’t have to remind you that the later was one thing that Taylor Swift did NOT “Shake Off.”  Talk about “Look at what you made me do.”

Someone who wants to be a voice for liberty and freedom. Telecom (Radio/TV) Pikes Peak Community College 1993-1998, BS Journalism, minor Political Science, Colorado State University-Pueblo 1999-2004

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

In a violent world, it’s time to do the right thing “for the children”

Published

on

In the never-ending assault on liberty, Progressive Democrats and Republicans often resort to using children as a type of political cover for their otherwise unpopular agenda. We are witnessing this right now as they work to dismantle the Second Amendment following the Florida high school shooting.

But let’s face it; who can say “no” to an agenda when it’s “for the children?”

Clearly, this ploy has paid huge dividends for big-government Progressives. One need look no further than the recent budget negotiations where the obsolete Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) was renewed for 6 years. Or the recent suggestion to use Social Security to finance big-government’s newest entitlement—Ivanka Trump’s Paid Family Leave.

Quite honestly “for the children” has been so successful that I’ve decided to adopt it myself. While Progressives use it to destroy freedom, I will use it to defend the Constitution.

For example, as I mentioned earlier, Progressives are using the Florida tragedy to void the Second Amendment to keep children safe. But I will defend gun rights because it’s the only way we can keep them safe. Unarmed Americans in gun-free zones will only lead to more tragedies like Florida, not fewer.

Additionally, I will defend the First Amendment “for the children.” What future awaits the next generation if liberty is destroyed due to being raised on political correctness and spending their time in safe-spaces?

In fact, I will defend the entire Constitution “for the children.” What future will the next generation have if tyranny replaces freedom?

I will also fight for the Convention of States‘ goal for a balanced budget amendment “for the children.” What kind of future will they have if they are forced to pay for our fiscal irresponsibility? And I will fight to end abortion “for the (unborn) children,” because they are deprived of even having a future when they are deprived their right to life.

While there will certainly be more issues to fight for, it’s time to get ready America. The Strident Conservative is going to be more strident than ever because, after all, it’s “for the children.”

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 

David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His politically incorrect and always “right” columns are featured on RedState.com, NOQReport.com, and TheResurgent.com.

His daily radio commentary is nationally syndicated with Salem Radio Network and can be heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook.

Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Let’s Just Say It: The Socialist-Left Doesn’t Really Care About Protecting Children.

Published

on

By

The Socialist Left cares more about gun confiscation than any common sense ideas that will really protect kids.

Once again, we are witness to the nation’s Socialist-Left blithely assuming the unearned mantle of moral superiority because they supposedly care for ‘the children’. Allegedly ‘objective’ journalists are falling all over themselves to promote a nascent campaign to destroy our common sense civil rights to the exclusion of steps that will really ‘Do Something’.

It is not without a hint of irony that the nation’s Socialist-Left does not care about children before they are born.  But soon after they become a precious commodity that must be protected at all costs – including everyone’s fundamental human rights. Those who are merely a cluster of cells or some other humanity denying pejorative in the womb, suddenly become children to be exploited for political gain upon their full emergence into the world.

Gun Control Doesn’t Work – If it did, Chicago would be the safest city in the nation.

Before the nation’s Socialist-Left is celebrated by the world with the laurels protector of children par excellence, shouldn’t we check their alleged solutions as to whether they work? For if gun control doesn’t work, then they are merely setting up next the mass murder tragedy, and for another round of attacks on our civil rights.

Examine their much ballyhooed utterances over the past few days: The national socialist left is promising a little temporary safety exchange for a mere pittance of our essential liberty. Of course, if they are pressed on the point, they will respond with some sort of meaningless boilerplate about cutting down the carnage. Even so, such vague promises are hardly worth the loss of liberty it would entail.

So what are we getting for the low-low cost of our freedom? How do their ‘solutions’ fair in the real world? Do they actually protect people? Or do they make the situation worse – far worse?

Well, we already know that very much like it’s tyrannical half-sister socialism, Gun control doesn’t work. Just ask the good people of Chicago or Caracas whether or not depriving the innocent of their means of self-defence will protect them. Parenthetically speaking, if gun control actually worked in some mythical Utopia, we would be hearing it about 24/7. This fantasy world doesn’t exist, but there are other steps that can be taken to save at least one life – and isn’t that the standard by which such things are measured?

Commonsense steps that will really protect children and their Civil Rights.

There have been plenty of suggested initiatives that will help reduce these terrorist attacks, from containing the contagion by reducing the killer’s media profile to providing better security. Not to mention restoring basic discipline and a moral underpinning to our children, or simply letting people defend themselves getting rid of the insanity of so-called “Gun Free” zones.

But instead of discussing steps that will actually work, the Socialist-Left ridicules them.  Or they insanely advocate we go further in removing God from the public square or decree them to be a redirection from their real obsession.

The Takeaway

To be perfectly blunt about it: The most disgusting aspect of this whole cycle is that it won’t do a thing to protect children and we will be back here doing the very same thing in a few weeks or months. That is what is sickening about this whole affair, and just crediting the Socialist-Left with just a modicum of basic intelligence will show that they know this as well.

To the nation’s Socialist-Left, getting to their ultimate goal gun confiscation is far more important than the lives of children they supposedly want to protect. They care more about depriving people of the means to resist [how’s that for a word?] to their Marxist tyranny than everyone’s safety, and they are willing to climb over the bodies of children to get there. If the nation’s Socialist-Left really cared about protecting children they would advocate what works instead of what brings them power.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Media: Please stop bringing Fame to mass murderers with the Gratuitous use of their Names and Imagery.

Published

on

By

It is time that we stop glamorising killers with unnecessary media fanfare    #NoFame4Killers

Saying that the Socialist-Left wants a certain level of violence to push gun control will always result in a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth. Still, it’s hard to shake that conclusion when it comes to the idea of refusing to bring fame to mass murderers. Studies have shown that these killers inspire others to copy their horrid acts, so it’s only logical that cutting down their media exposure would help alleviate the problem.

Proving the point is the report in the Miami Herald that: There have been threats of violence at 12 U.S. schools, at least, since Fla. Shooting, Including an arrest of a high school student who threatened ‘Round 2’ of Florida Shooting as reported at Tme.com

Consider a 2015 study from researchers at Arizona State University and Northeastern Illinois University reported in the PLOS journal, concluding that:

We find significant evidence that mass killings involving firearms are incented by similar events in the immediate past. On average, this temporary increase in probability lasts 13 days, and each incident incites at least 0.30 new incidents (p = 0.0015). We also find significant evidence of contagion in school shootings, for which an incident is contagious for an average of 13 days, and incites an average of at least 0.22 new incidents (p = 0.0001).

To make it perfectly clear, we are not talking about keeping this information secret or censoring the media. The data should be available in certain places in the media – a dispassionate recitation of the facts of the crime, to keep conspiracy theories and other such nonsense at bay. But there is no logical reason to make a mass murderer famous for the sake of clicks or ratings.

Nor is this a call for government intervention, this is more like a “gentlemen’s agreement” (or gentlewoman’s as the case may be) to stop gratuitously promoting these killers. It’s about denying fame to cowardly murderers who are the worst of the worst, nothing more, nothing less.

Consider that the experts in the field have detailed the extensive planning and preparation these mass murderers that proceeding through five distinct phases. This article published in PoliceOne.com detailed these stages: 5 phases of the active shooter: A tactical reload

1. Fantasy Phase
2. Planning Phase
3. Preparation Phase
4. Approach Phase
5. Implementation Phase

Are we to believe that the “Columbine effect” doesn’t factor in these stages?
In addition, are we to believe that in the Left’s magical “Gun-Free” Utopian fantasy land, that criminals of this type wouldn’t find alternative methods of mass murder?

Both sides of the political aisle have championed this have idea. It was extensively discussed on the Glenn Beck Radio program: Logic and Reason Needed, As well as the publication ‘Mother Jones’.  While we loathe to link to them, they did offer some useful tips to alleviate this deadly problem:

Report on the perpetrator forensically and with dispassionate language. Avoid terms like “lone wolf” and “school shooter,” which may carry cachet with young men aspiring to attack. Instead use “perpetrator,” “act of lone terrorism,” and “act of mass murder.”

Minimise use of the perpetrator’s name. When it isn’t necessary to repeat it, don’t. And don’t include middle names gratuitously, a common practice for distinguishing criminal suspects from others of the same name, but which can otherwise lend a false sense of their importance.

Keep the perpetrator’s name out of headlines. Rarely, if ever, will a generic reference to him in a headline be any less practical.

Minimize use of images of the perpetrator. This is especially important both in terms of aspiring copycats’ desire for fame, and the psychology of vulnerable individuals who identify with mass shooters.

When both ends of the political spectrum agree on something that is so basic and eminently obvious, everyone should take notice. But then again, maybe there are those who really want a certain level of violence, who would prefer to tilt at the windmill of gun control and never really solve anything.

 

 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.